Copyrights @ savz, SSC member

September 9th, 2011
Copyright@Savz (Taken from the same place where the Orchid Crown site pics were taken)
http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/1972/img0598cx.jpg

Distant look:
http://img847.imageshack.us/img847/4729/img0602h.jpg

is this tower a residential or is it a hotel?

Residential

Copyrights @ darkhorses

cc-me
http://img691.imageshack.us/img691/6706/photo0194t.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/691/photo0194t.jpg/)

http://img842.imageshack.us/img842/562/photo0204i.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/842/photo0204i.jpg/)

So height is more important to you than design? :weirdo:

No, fool. :bash: Just in this case, not generally! But since you seem to be so concerned with design, why don't we just petition to have this demolished and built a nice looking house on its place. Would that make you happier? Granted, I'm all for a good design, but if you honesly would rather see a "good looking" 5 floor building then this, then you are the weirdo, not me.

No, fool. :bash: Just in this case, not generally! But since you seem to be so concerned with design, why don't we just petition to have this demolished and built a nice looking house on its place. Would that make you happier? Granted, I'm all for a good design, but if you honesly would rather see a "good looking" 5 floor building then this, then you are the weirdo, not me.

So, the only choices are an ugly supertall, a nice looking house, or a good looking 5 story building? I'm sure it was an agonizing decision for the developer.... the worst part is you having the gall to call somebody else a weirdo, and then going ahead with one of the most absurd comparisons I have ever seen on this site.

So, the only choices are an ugly supertall, a nice looking house, or a good looking 5 story building? I'm sure it was an agonizing decision for the developer.... the worst part is you having the gall to call somebody else a weirdo, and then going ahead with one of the most absurd comparisons I have ever seen on this site.

Well first of all, I just have to thank you for jumping in on my conversation with another person. Secondly, I was never the one who said this was an ugly supertall, and the original person I was talking to made a rash decision about my personal building choices(remember, he was the one who had the gall to call me a weirdo in the first place just because I thought the building as is, regardless of the cladding holds merit because of its height). He ( and apparently you too, based on your comment), happen to think that the building is ugly, so I was simply comparing it against other worse possibilties. I not saying it couldn't be better, but I don't feel it neccessarily would be by being chopped in half and clad in glass. I would rather see it at full height as is.
So, I hope you understand, I wasn't trying to hurl insults at anyone, but rather, I was just a tad incredulous about someone attacking me over such a non- issue. So calm down pal.
:pet:

http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/6351/capturehsl.jpg
Current construction status. Courtesty deekshith

What's that mark?

The height that it is currently at ;)

This building is starting to look nice.

From SSC India section.

Taken today, 25th Sep 2011
Copyright@Savz
Palais Royale from a distance
http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/629/img0690oo.jpg

http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/7455/img0689cq.jpg

http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/7205/img0688xc.jpg

http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/9224/img0684c.jpg

Close-up:
http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/6452/img0683pa.jpg

http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/6906/img0681c.jpg

from SSC India copyright deekshith
Distant view of palais royale at about 9km from the site and 7km from viverea.

Sept 23rd 2011
Photo copyright: Vinay G

http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/9673/87260880.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/90/87260880.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

Zoomed in
http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/4193/capturerst.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/28/capturerst.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

Now the floor counts are including the podium(~2floors). Earlier i used to exclude that.

http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/1359/capturehs.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/148/capturehs.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

Oct 1st 2011

Oct 1st 2011

Photo copyright: Yasin Esaf (http://www.panoramio.com/photo/59874231)
http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/4751/capturehca.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/823/capturehca.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/5194/79682222.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/171/79682222.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/8775/86829238.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/195/86829238.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

^^^^^^^ Comin up pretty nice!!

Is this gonna be the tallest building in india once completed?

How tall are the Imperial towers?

^^^^^^^ Comin up pretty nice!!

Is this gonna be the tallest building in india once completed?

How tall are the Imperial towers?


yea it will be tallest in India for 1-2 years

The Imperial Mumbai is 249m(817ft) tall

Imperial towers are 254m tall.

Imperial towers are 254m tall.

http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=31571

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Imperial,_Mumbai
its 249

Your going to believe Skyscraper page? The builder even said The Imperial Towers are 254m -

A quick view of what hidden inside The Imperial towers, a fully residential 61 storied tower, 254M (827') in height

http://shapoorji.in/db/files/we@sp_july-sep 2010.pdf

But anyway, yeah Palais Royale is much taller than them.

Your going to believe Skyscraper page? The builder even said The Imperial Towers are 254m -



http://shapoorji.in/db/files/we@sp_july-sep 2010.pdf

But anyway, yeah Palais Royale is much taller than them.


ok I agree they are 254m tall now going to edit on wiki
and yes when completed palais royale will be tallest in South Asia and first ever supertall in this part of world

I don't know if this has been pointed out already or not, but the name "Palais Royale" is actually grammatically incorrect in French. Since "palais" is masculine, there should be no 'e' at the end of "royale" - i.e. the correct spelling is "Palais Royal".

You would think they might have checked that first :P

I don't know if this has been pointed out already or not, but the name "Palais Royale" is actually grammatically incorrect in French. Since "palais" is masculine, there should be no 'e' at the end of "royale" - i.e. the correct spelling is "Palais Royal".

You would think they might have checked that first :P

Yes you may be right about the French grammar, but we Indians like to stab names and foreign grammar right in their chest

:nuts:

I don't know if this has been pointed out already or not, but the name "Palais Royale" is actually grammatically incorrect in French. Since "palais" is masculine, there should be no 'e' at the end of "royale" - i.e. the correct spelling is "Palais Royal".

You would think they might have checked that first :P


you are right there is a palace named palais royale in France so they just used that name

horrible design...

Cross-post by deekshit in Mumbai forums, Sept 30th 2011

Photo copyright: Sreedev

http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/1246/dscn0124j.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/651/dscn0124j.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

Yes you may be right about the French grammar, but we Indians like to stab names and foreign grammar right in their chest

:nuts:

Yes, there is a bunch if Italian names in Mumbai as well :lol:

:cheers:

October 1 5:30am - view from love grove flyover
Copyright Aditya Waiku
http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/6946/32557116825711992490911.jpg

Yes, there is a bunch if Italian names in Mumbai as well :lol:

LOL

'ciao ciao cafe' :lol:

I dont know why but Palais royale seems to be dominating the new mumbai skyline ....it seems like one of those buildings at the center in all cartoon skylines!

Cross post

Copyright Eagal69/Yasin Esaf
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/9118/60558990.jpg (http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/60558990.jpg)

http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/6324/60559016.jpg (http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/60559016.jpg)

Tall building at the center :cheers:

Pic taken today
http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/2771/image987.jpg

Any idea how tall it is at the moment? around 250 m'ish maybe?

Around 225 meters and one of the core is at around 235(?) meters.

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/5941/img20111101160834.jpg

http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/162/img20111101160930.jpg

http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/1879/img20111101161114.jpg

http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/2577/img20111101161744.jpg

HEIGHT of ugliness

Can't wait for them to clad this ugly *peep*....lots and lots of makeup to hide its true colour....lol

^^ Agreed. It looks proper rank at the moment

This one will really reach 333m?

^^I hope CTBUH is wrong with 295m.

I think its 320 m as stated in the architect's site.

^^ height will surely cross 320m its currently near 250m with approx 17 floors to go at an average of 4.5m per floor it will add 76.5m to this height

Hope thats the case!

HEIGHT of ugliness

loooooooooool

This building is lame :(

Latest -

Palais Royale between Kalpataru Horizon
http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/6201/image997.jpg

Can't wait for them to clad this ugly *peep*....lots and lots of makeup to hide its true colour....lol

who said they're going to clad it?

Cross post

Copyright Eagal69/Yasin Esaf
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/9118/60558990.jpg (http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/60558990.jpg)

http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/6324/60559016.jpg (http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/60559016.jpg)

Is that paint on the concrete? This will look as weatherbeaten as the rest of the area it's in in about 5 years! Might be the ugliest supertall I've ever seen, at least in the quality of construction.

Is that paint on the concrete? This will look as weatherbeaten as the rest of the area it's in in about 5 years! Might be the ugliest supertall I've ever seen, at least in the quality of construction.

I don't understand it either. Painting direct on concrete is a sin. It will look horrible after a few years. A small 2 stories high building...okay. It's easy to paint it again in 5 years. But a supertall? And why brown? I still hope the brown is some sort of protective paint and will be painted white later...

This makes me sad. Lots of great buildings going up in India right now, but this is a shame.

I don't think it is the final paint, it must be some kind of protection until they clad this entire building with Corian. So guys u have nothing to worry about, although glass would've been much nicer.

who said they're going to clad it?

Here you go, the quote below is taken from the architect's site below.

Architect's website (http://tparch.net/viewproject.php?id=22)

A single residential tower rising to an immense height of 320 meters, Palais Royale coming up at Worli, in Central Mumbai is an iconic project.

With under 100 exclusive apartments the design is an engineering feat, incorporating an astounding 200 meter atrium one of the tallest ever atriums in a residential building. Planned to be the first skyscraper to be completely clad with Corian®, the facade will be weather resistant to humidity and tropical weather thereby completely maintenance free.
Although the building offers unlimited state of the art luxury, it is an environmentally friendly project being the first residential building in India with a LEEDS rating with the possibility of being the first residential building in the world to get a Platinum evaluation.

It is our intention at TPA that 'Palais Royale' after completion will succeed in setting bench marks for all future local construction and planning in the country.

A Nice render (http://tparch.net/index.php) on Architect's site

this tower is incredible!!

This building is lame :(

Yes, clearly the opinion of someone who idolizes Lady Gaga should be taken seriously - especially in regards to aesthetics.

:colbert:

I don't understand it either. Painting direct on concrete is a sin. It will look horrible after a few years. A small 2 stories high building...okay. It's easy to paint it again in 5 years. But a supertall? And why brown? I still hope the brown is some sort of protective paint and will be painted white later...

This makes me sad. Lots of great buildings going up in India right now, but this is a shame.

It looks like they're painting on corian cladding. Nevertheless, it doesn't make it look any better. :ohno:

This building is lame :(

:ohno::ohno::ohno::ohno::ohno::(:(:(:(

this tower is incredible!!

http://www.myfacewhen.net/uploads/585-u-serious-kent-from-dead-rising.png

^^Dude, people have their own taste. It could be sarcasm or he really might mean it. There is no surprise if someone actually likes this tower, I don't, but we know we are all different.

http://www.myfacewhen.net/uploads/585-u-serious-kent-from-dead-rising.png

yes, but I say it because is really huge! no for it's design

But I think that the tower will look nice..

I guess, being huge is the only prominent thing about it.

It's not that bad .

^^Dude, people have their own taste. It could be sarcasm or he really might mean it. There is no surprise if someone actually likes this tower, I don't, but we know we are all different.

:okay::okay::okay::okay:

Latest -


13th Nov, 2011
Copyright@Savz

Image#1:
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/4826/palaisroyale131120111.jpg

Image#2:
http://img847.imageshack.us/img847/221/palaisroyale131120112.jpg

Image#3:
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/4319/palaisroyale131120113.jpg

15th Nov, 2011
Copyright@Savz

Updates:

Image#1:
http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/364/palaisroyale151120111.jpg

Image#2:Taken from the terrace from where i shot Four Seasons Tower 2 Site pics
http://img810.imageshack.us/img810/7428/palaisroyale151120112.jpg

Image#3:
http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/9387/palaisroyale151120113.jpg

Image#4:
http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/1155/palaisroyale151120114.jpg

Progressing at a fast pace !

What's that thin project in Nov. 15th image #3?

^^
Lokhandwala victoria (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1263911): 55 fl.

This tower had to cut in half, so you get two towers, twin towers, together with the same floor space, but with a plausible size.

^^What are you talking about?, I don't understand.

^^ That instead of one broad tower there are two thinner towers.

^^
Lokhandwala victoria (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1263911): 55 fl.

Thanks. :)

Just meh. The one next to it looks way better and more interesting to look at. How tall is it? Cuz I just can see the nomber of floors on it's local thread.

^^Its quite short, probably around 200 metres

Can someone provide pictures of this 200m atrium? Or at least a render of what it will look like? AND only 100 apartments in this huge building? Super rich only please...

cc astroboy

http://img812.imageshack.us/img812/1858/img0016gh.jpg

Getting denser.

cc Bombaywalla

http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/7720/27960367.jpg

http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/7826/86708046.jpg

Getting denser.

Absolutely! Mostly residential though, we need some tall offices too. :)

Looking great!

:cheers:

23 Dec 2011.

Photo copyright: SURYA SARATHI Dutta

Cropped and zoomed in from the below picture.
http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/7814/dscn0521t.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/249/dscn0521t.jpg/)

Original pic.
http://img855.imageshack.us/img855/8229/dscn0521j.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/855/dscn0521j.jpg/)

Absolutely! Mostly residential though, we need some tall offices too. :)

True. But I think they are having the BKC and other new upcoming areas reserved for office spaces. 60-70 floor official spaces would be awesome as well.

Great Building

Very ugly building... :ohno:

Ugly or not , it's tall and that's a good thing IMO :dunno:

没有进展吗？

没有进展吗？

Progressing at a good speed.

Abraham Lincoln called, he wants his skyscraper back.

hillarious, yet true!

getting along nicely

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7151/6677306967_8c9e2ce9fc_b.jpg

http://img855.imageshack.us/img855/7152/20120107143330.jpg

http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/9792/20120107145816.jpg

No glass yet? Not much floors actually.
From that tower you will have a nice view over the beach and the sea.

I count around 60 floors to the highest core, nearly topped out :)

:cheers2:

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7151/6677306967_8c9e2ce9fc_b.jpg

http://img855.imageshack.us/img855/7152/20120107143330.jpg

http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/9792/20120107145816.jpg



:banana::banana::banana::cheers::cheers::cheers::):):):banana::banana::cheers::cheers:

tall..but very ordinary design....sad !!!!

^^ thats true. how about the cladding: will it be just painted white and brown how you can see on the last pic?

I'm hoping the glass will soften its appearance somewhat, it really is a massive brute at the moment.

Guys, to me this building looks fine, but the surrounding buildings look like dilapidated old homes. Is Mumbai working on a renovation plan for this area, which it so desperately seems to need?

^^ thats true. how about the cladding: will it be just painted white and brown how you can see on the last pic?

I think the white and brown "paint" u are referring to are claddings only...but then again they are nothing spectacular..lets wait for the construction to finish..

But overall , personally very disappointed with the project...they could have done much better...:bash::bash:

For chrissake, painting is not cladding. They are gonna cover the whole thing with hard plastic called corian clad.

the white you see is actually corian cladding..glass will soften it up

http://www.cdukltd.co.uk/img/cladding_01.jpg

quite imposing in the area

:cheers:

Jan 23 2012.

Palais Royale and Victoria.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7167/6755838239_8d8064182c_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rwp-roger/6755838239/)
Up early before a long day of business… the pool is much smaller than you would like! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rwp-roger/6755838239/) by antwerpenR (http://www.flickr.com/people/rwp-roger/), on Flickr

Jan 23 2012.

SOURCE (http://fineartamerica.com/art/all/mumbai+skyline/posters)

http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/92/86308047.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/705/86308047.jpg/)

This thing is absolutely huge!

In a way, this type of megacapacity structure is just what a densely populated city like Mumbai needs. Of course the aesthetic could be better (I don't think it's really that bad) but let's hope this will lead to other such daring designs. I'd like to see the audacious India Tower built!

on march 1st I will see this monster with my own eyes.

on march 1st I will see this monster with my own eyes.

And then we would like to see more of this monster through some camera. :)

cc astroboy

http://img812.imageshack.us/img812/1858/img0016gh.jpg

Great development

from mumbai forum
Feb 27 2012.
From this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9q4w2y_Rs4&feature=player_embedded).

http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/6302/69553158.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/809/69553158.jpg/)

This thing is absolutely huge!

In a way, this type of megacapacity structure is just what a densely populated city like Mumbai needs.

Are you kidding? It is a HUGE structure for an absolutely TINY number of (mega-rich) people. Look at the statistics. 67 floors for a supertall!

"With under 100 exclusive apartments the design is an engineering feat, incorporating an astounding 200 meter atrium one of the tallest ever atriums in a residential building"

Penetrating issue for the future of India.

By the way there is a job cut in my company. Do you know the name of the plan for cutting jobs : "Together for a better future but without you". This is funny, isn't it ?

200 meter atrium, man that is great. Like the Burj al Arab.

^^ More like a huge pit, depending on how well it is being cladded and lit.

Are you kidding? It is a HUGE structure for an absolutely TINY number of (mega-rich) people.

In that case, I am disappoint. I was expecting the capacity to justify the hugeness.

http://i.imgur.com/qsKYw.png

^not every building has to be a slum rehabilitation project... :P

the atrium could turn out amazing :cheers: i just hope now that the cladding will turn out a lot better than the renders

I was always wondering how such huge structure could make a sense. In terms of light availability for instance - its so freaking wide. The answer couldn't be simpler: its empty inside :D It will be one hell of an atrium right there :cheers:

cross posting from SSCIhttp://img821.imageshack.us/img821/4497/pr20120309130417.jpg
http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/994/pr20120309140346.jpg
http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/146/20120309152406.jpg
http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/3276/20120309142823.jpg
http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/4471/pr20120309132326.jpg

from mumbai forum
Mar 30 2012.

Photo copyright: Cole M B (http://www.flickr.com/photos/45696213@N02/6885052546/in/photostream/)

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/6774/6885052546a4defc471cb.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/444/6885052546a4defc471cb.jpg/)

I have to say. In some strange way I really love that ugly bastard :D

Lol. I feel the same way.

i just hope the cladding will look better than on the renders, maybe it won't look too ugly afterall

I have to say. In some strange way I really love that ugly bastard :D

:lol: Same here, I think it's just because of how massive it is though.....

Ugly, but big --> cool :cool:

As per calculations by Forumers in the Mumbai Subforum , the cores have already breached the 300 m mark !!

The first supertall or many to come in Mumbai !! actually its the first supertall in all of South Asia ...

:lol: Same here, I think it's just because of how massive it is though.....

Yup, i believe this is it :cheers:

other than that, I love the idea of huge atrium inside :)

^^ Yes I can't wait to see pics of the atrium! Will be amazing :)

Someone actually posted a picture of the atrium, but it was removed. It was very interesting. Can't wait to see a picture of it completed.

As per calculations by Forumers in the Mumbai Subforum , the cores have already breached the 300 m mark !!

The first supertall or many to come in Mumbai !! actually its the first supertall in all of South Asia ...

It's great that Mumbai's breached the Supertall mark for good at long last. Unfortunately, there are taller buildings in Thailand and Malaysia, so we can only claim tallest in the subcontinent for now. Hopefully, that can be rectified soon, especially if India Tower gets going again. :)

^^ It will easily have the most amount of supertalls soon though :)

As per calculations by Forumers in the Mumbai Subforum , the cores have already breached the 300 m mark !!

The first supertall or many to come in Mumbai !! actually its the first supertall in all of South Asia ...

It's great that Mumbai's breached the Supertall mark for good at long last. Unfortunately, there are taller buildings in Thailand and Malaysia, so we can only claim tallest in the subcontinent for now. Hopefully, that can be rectified soon, especially if India Tower gets going again. :)

South Asia means the countries of Afghanistan,Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Iran, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam becomes South-east Asian countries.

It's great that Mumbai's breached the Supertall mark for good at long last. Unfortunately, there are taller buildings in Thailand and Malaysia, so we can only claim tallest in the subcontinent for now. Hopefully, that can be rectified soon, especially if India Tower gets going again. :)

As Deekshith already said that Malaysia and Thailand are SE Asia , BTW this will be talles than any building built or under construction in Thailand. THough petronas towers in Malaysia are 452 meters !!

Yeah in numbers or supertall India may soon be in top 3 in Asia and of course if India Tower gets built then its balle balle :banana:

Agreed, India Tower will change Mumbai big time.

Not just Mumbai, but the entire face of India. People will think less and less about slums when they hear or think about India. Of course India needs more towers for that to happen.

South Asia means the countries of Afghanistan,Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Iran, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam becomes South-east Asian countries.

Deekshith, my mistake. :) There is little real competition in South Asia in terms of Supertalls, I would love to see India putting up towers that compete on the world stage. Guess we will have to wait a little while for it but the day's not that far off!

South Asia means the countries of Afghanistan,Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Iran, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka.
Milad Tower in Tehran is 435m.

Lotus Tower in Colombo is supposed to be 350m (but u/c at the moment).

Iran is South West Asia/Middle East.

Milad Tower in Tehran is 435m.

Lotus Tower in Colombo is supposed to be 350m (but u/c at the moment).


The post i have quoted there is about the tallest building of south Asia and NOT about the tallest structure of south asia. :)

Not just Mumbai, but the entire face of India. People will think less and less about slums when they hear or think about India. Of course India needs more towers for that to happen.

No, it needs less slums. :ohno:

great for bombay.
needs some 21st C office towers to complete the pic after the metro is finished.
Oh yeah and a mechanised street cleaning system....

i just hope the cladding will look better than on the renders, maybe it won't look too ugly afterall

Cladding almost never looks better in reality than in the renders, usually it looks worse because the renders have been stylized by computer to look more impressive.

I think there is some major error corrections required in the height of the building. It allegedly 320m in height. but if you see the structural plan and reports it shows only 298m. Even if you add up the floors 67 and the height of each floor 14ft. it comes upto 938 ft. only.

This is like some fraud to become the tallest building in the town. It's a tall building but I think playing such marketing tricks is very unethical and bad.

great for bombay.
needs some 21st C office towers to complete the pic after the metro is finished.
Oh yeah and a mechanised street cleaning system....

You should donate a few Mr. "Buddhist".

This tower is ugly as hell :lol: Mumbai has luck, that there is still Abraj al-Bait and Ryungyong hotel, which are far more worse

I think there is some major error corrections required in the height of the building. It allegedly 320m in height. but if you see the structural plan and reports it shows only 298m. Even if you add up the floors 67 and the height of each floor 14ft. it comes upto 938 ft. only.

This is like some fraud to become the tallest building in the town. It's a tall building but I think playing such marketing tricks is very unethical and bad.

Don't forget the bit on the top, you'll probably find that's where the missing hight is ;)

http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/8339/royale1800x600.jpg

[...]Ryungyong hotel, which are far more worse

Definitely one of the most beautiful hotels in my opinion, this one is far worse and ugly :nono:
Mumbai still has the problem with the huge slums and with these nobody will think of a modern, clean and developed city when speaking about Mumbai. At leat I wouldn't, even if there were more skyscrapers and office buildings.

Definitely one of the most beautiful hotels in my opinion, this one is far worse and ugly :nono:
Mumbai still has the problem with the huge slums and with these nobody will think of a modern, clean and developed city when speaking about Mumbai. At leat I wouldn't, even if there were more skyscrapers and office buildings.

Boss you are right but have you ever tried to know the reason behind this?Mumbai is the 4th densest metropolis in the world with least amount of space.So the house rent and land price is among the highest in the world.Hence 50% people can't afford those expensive flats in the city.Plus the extreme weather doesn't help as far as cleanness of city is concerned.Please go through the 2 links.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_by_population
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_proper_by_population

You should donate a few Mr. "Buddhist".

why ?

Boss you are right but have you ever tried to know the reason behind this?Mumbai is the 4th densest metropolis in the world with least amount of space.So the house rent and land price is among the highest in the world.Hence 50% people can't afford those expensive flats in the city.Plus the extreme weather doesn't help as far as cleanness of city is concerned.Please go through the 2 links.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_by_population
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_proper_by_population

area of Mumbai is 603km2 not 2350km2 and the city literally is hellish especially if you come from a sleepy town like that of mine.

The post i have quoted there is about the tallest building of south Asia and NOT about the tallest structure of south asia. :)

I was about to say. Indeed, it will be the tallest building in the region once completed.

.Plus the extreme weather doesn't help as far as cleanness of city is concerned

cant believe that anyone seriously believes that bombay, or anywhere in india (or south asia as a whole)is dirty because of the weather.
unbelievable.
thailand shares similar weather and is squweaky clean.as is malaysia. and of course singapore.
thailand was as poor as india is now when i first went there almost 30 years ago.
and although it wasnt spotless like it is now, it was much much cleaner than india presently
not just on the city streets but also in shared inside spaces like corridors and in public buildings.
Burma is poorer than india , and very run down. but its cleaner
there are many reasons why india is dirty, poverty, bad infra/system, population,education, lack of scientific belief in germ theory, etc etc.
But to quote the famous phrase'we are like this only' maybe the reason is , when all the reasons are added together, that its india

.Plus the extreme weather doesn't help as far as cleanness of city is concerned

cant believe that anyone seriously believes that bombay, or anywhere in india (or south asia as a whole)is dirty because of the weather.
unbelievable.
thailand shares similar weather and is squweaky clean.as is malaysia. and of course singapore.
thailand was as poor as india is now when i first went there almost 30 years ago.
and although it wasnt spotless like it is now, it was much much cleaner than india presently
not just on the city streets but also in shared inside spaces like corridors and in public buildings.
Burma is poorer than india , and very run down. but its cleaner
there are many reasons why india is dirty, poverty, bad infra/system, population,education, lack of scientific belief in germ theory, etc etc.
But to quote the famous phrase'we are like this only' maybe the reason is , when all the reasons are added together, that its india

+1. It is OUR Attitude, that must change. And the difference between other cities and Mumbai, even Delhi and Mumbai, is unbelievably vast. Mumbai has been abused again and again. It needs governance reform.

.Plus the extreme weather doesn't help as far as cleanness of city is concerned

cant believe that anyone seriously believes that bombay, or anywhere in india (or south asia as a whole)is dirty because of the weather.
unbelievable.
thailand shares similar weather and is squweaky clean.as is malaysia. and of course singapore.
thailand was as poor as india is now when i first went there almost 30 years ago.
and although it wasnt spotless like it is now, it was much much cleaner than india presently
not just on the city streets but also in shared inside spaces like corridors and in public buildings.
Burma is poorer than india , and very run down. but its cleaner
there are many reasons why india is dirty, poverty, bad infra/system, population,education, lack of scientific belief in germ theory, etc etc.
But to quote the famous phrase'we are like this only' maybe the reason is , when all the reasons are added together, that its india

Ok what is the population of those countries you have mentioned here?The population is the greatest problem of all.Population density of Mumbai is the 4th highest in the world and that of city proper is worse.There are many clean and beautiful cities in India like Chandigarh,Bhubaneswar,Mysore,Surat etc etc.Why do you consider Mumbai to be entire India.It's a great city but it has its own share of limitations.
Singapore has to maintain only 1 city,same case with Malaysia or Thailand.But India has to take care of 40/50 big cities having population over 1million and we are not China that we can displace whoever we want.But yes Indians lack civic sense which is pathetic.We can do much better.

.Plus the extreme weather doesn't help as far as cleanness of city is concerned

cant believe that anyone seriously believes that bombay, or anywhere in india (or south asia as a whole)is dirty because of the weather.
unbelievable.
thailand shares similar weather and is squweaky clean.as is malaysia. and of course singapore.
thailand was as poor as india is now when i first went there almost 30 years ago.
and although it wasnt spotless like it is now, it was much much cleaner than india presently
not just on the city streets but also in shared inside spaces like corridors and in public buildings.
Burma is poorer than india , and very run down. but its cleaner
there are many reasons why india is dirty, poverty, bad infra/system, population,education, lack of scientific belief in germ theory, etc etc.
But to quote the famous phrase'we are like this only' maybe the reason is , when all the reasons are added together, that its india

You're annoying. Go away. Nobody cares about your banal 1990s cliche posts.

Palais Royale is 13 metres shorter now?

You're annoying. Go away. Nobody cares about your banal 1990s cliche posts.

+1

Why is that whenever there is talk of a super tall building in India, someone has to take up the slums as if that's all there's to the country?

Ok what is the population of those countries you have mentioned here?The population is the greatest problem of all.Population density of Mumbai is the 4th highest in the world and that of city proper is worse.There are many clean and beautiful cities in India like Chandigarh,Bhubaneswar,Mysore,Surat etc etc.Why do you consider Mumbai to be entire India.It's a great city but it has its own share of limitations.
Singapore has to maintain only 1 city,same case with Malaysia or Thailand.But India has to take care of 40/50 big cities having population over 1million and we are not China that we can displace whoever we want.But yes Indians lack civic sense which is pathetic.We can do much better.

those cities are not international standard clean.in my memory only bhubaneswar seemed in a good state .
you misunderstand that size is not an issue.Or pop density.
managing one city or 20 is the same
HK, Tokyo have v high pop density. But there in a differnt league to indian cities.
the indian propblem is not one of physical circumstance.Its both a rural AND problem in india. its one of mind set and implementation.
oh and time i guess :)

It looks like a multi storey carpark to me :drool:

Some floors are allocated to parking as well.

those cities are not international standard clean.in my memory only bhubaneswar seemed in a good state .
you misunderstand that size is not an issue.Or pop density.
managing one city or 20 is the same
HK, Tokyo have v high pop density. But there in a differnt league to indian cities.
the indian propblem is not one of physical circumstance.Its both a rural AND problem in india. its one of mind set and implementation.
oh and time i guess :)

Mumbai (ans India) are still not as rich as Hong Kong and Tokyo, Mumbai is actually a very clean city if you remove those migrants living in the slums.

Eeew. Very nasty design.

Mumbai (ans India) are still not as rich as Hong Kong and Tokyo, Mumbai is actually a very clean city if you remove those migrants living in the slums.

cleanlynes is not about slums..
and as i said burma is poorer than india but cleaner.
humans , when together in one place , tend to produce 'dirt'
its whether its cleaned up properly that is the issue here :cheers:

supertall?

Don't forget the bit on the top, you'll probably find that's where the missing hight is ;)

http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/8339/royale1800x600.jpg



You can't say that the top part is 20 meters in height. That's not believeable. I can't believe they are playing such trash in the market. (though I would love to stay in this building irrespective of its height (whether 298 mtrs or 320 mtrs....lolzz) But should the government allow such publicity tricks to claim the tallest building in Mumbai ?

Some floors are allocated to parking as well.

So you mean to say the parking floor's height is bigger than the actual floor height (which itself is a staggering 13ft-14ft)?. Infact the parking floor's are normally reduced in height.

I think there is some major error corrections required in the height of the building. It allegedly 320m in height. but if you see the structural plan and reports it shows only 298m. Even if you add up the floors 67 and the height of each floor 14ft. it comes upto 938 ft. only.

This is like some fraud to become the tallest building in the town. It's a tall building but I think playing such marketing tricks is very unethical and bad.

So even if you add up each floor height of 14ft for 67 floors (which also includes the parking floors: the parking floors are not separately counted in the plan) it still comes to only 285.902 meters. which leaves 12 meters to even reach 298 meters. So their claim of 320 meters is still far far off. I think someone should bring this up to the authority or Palais Royale should correct it's advertising tricks.

In addition to the above, I found something more:

from what I understand is that Palais Royale is granted enough FSI to construct 298mts building. It's reduced to much much less, thanks to the DCR rules:
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/bmc-notice-to-six-underconstruction-towers/901397/

From the above article we can make that the 298 mtrs building may now be somewhere between 10 to 20 floors less in building. Sad but true. yes it may be argued that the High Court has quashed the notice, but it must be noted that the HC only quashed the notice in order to allow the authority to take a stronger step:

"The court held that the policy cannot be revised through a mere circular and that the state government must amend the Development Control Regulations (DCR) in order to bring about any change in the rules. State government officials confirmed that they would be issuing the amended rules soon."
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/hc-strikes-down-civic-body-showcauses-to-6-developers/925756/

Thus, this project may probably get suspended for a long time (once again) and the FSI eventually may be reduced keeping the height of the building probably to 50 floors only.

However, i think Palais Royale may finish constructing those many floors by then, in which case I don't know if the High Court will ask to break down those many floors (which is not practically possible in my opinion) or allow Palais Royale to benefit from the same. In either case, the occupation certificate may not be issued to the residents till this matter may get decided which may easily be upto 3-5 years.

btw, what is the approximate rate/price which is prevailing in this building (if one intends to buy for self-occupation, not investment)

^^ You read that article totally wrong! They said that this tower was one of 11 towers to be given certificates to build car park levels of between 10-20 levels, and that once they are completed they would be handed over to BMC. ( which I guess is a car park company of some sort).

Also the information on the architects site says that this will be 320m.

I'm not sure where you got 14ft per floor from because the average height for the floors in this tower is 4.5m which over 67 floors is around 300m and add the thing on top, which you can see in the below picture, it will make the 320m mark. (I posted the wrong photo last time sorry)

Architects website (http://tparch.net/viewproject.php?id=22)

http://tparch.net/large/Palais%20Royale2.jpg

:cheers:

btw, what is the approximate rate/price which is prevailing in this building (if one intends to buy for self-occupation, not investment)

I guess instead of asking the same question everytime in every thread, better contact a real estate agent and ask him about the information you need for many of the buildings in the city. He would be able to provide you or direct you coz this is not exactly the right place for these questions.

^^ You read that article totally wrong! They said that this tower was one of 11 towers to be given certificates to build car park levels of between 10-20 levels, and that once they are completed they would be handed over to BMC. ( which I guess is a car park company of some sort).


BMC is Brihanmumbai Mahanagar Palika, which is a Municipal Corporation of the city.

@Sky_India .. even with 298 meters it will be the tallest building in India (Imperial towers are around 256 mts) and even if it is 320 meters it won't remain the talles building in India for too long (world one and others !! )

I don't understand what your questions are .. what you are pointing had been discussed on this forum long ago. Wait for the final product and you will get your answers .. its almost done .. BTW floor heights in this building is 4.5 meters which is more than the 14ft you are citing ..

BMC is Brihanmumbai Mahanagar Palika, which is a Municipal Corporation of the city.

Oh okay, thanks :)

Its more than 70m wide, that is why it looks short. So the height to width ratio is a bit higher than 4:1

You can't say that the top part is 20 meters in height. That's not believeable. I can't believe they are playing such trash in the market. (though I would love to stay in this building irrespective of its height (whether 298 mtrs or 320 mtrs....lolzz) But should the government allow such publicity tricks to claim the tallest building in Mumbai ?

looks small to me

This is a joke right?

are u drunk??

http://www.infoocean.info/avatar3.jpgIn the renderings it doesn't look that high

Compare it to the other buildings in this render, it's massive!
http://tparch.net/large/Palais%20Royale2.jpg

March 30th Pic Photo Copy Right Cole M B (http://www.flickr.com/photos/45696213@N02/6885052546/in/photostream/)
http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/6774/6885052546a4defc471cb.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/444/6885052546a4defc471cb.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

The building you see on the left is the 55 storey Victoria which is almost topeed Out , So now you can imagine the height and width of this Giant of a building !!

It is more than 50 meters wide and 320 mts Tall !! If you go through the forum we have had confirmation on height from many multiple sources.

^^ Looks a monster

March 30th Pic Photo Copy Right Cole M B (http://www.flickr.com/photos/45696213@N02/6885052546/in/photostream/)
http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/6774/6885052546a4defc471cb.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/444/6885052546a4defc471cb.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

The building you see on the left is the 55 storey Victoria which is almost topeed Out , So now you can imagine the height and width of this Giant of a building !!

It is more than 50 meters wide and 320 mts Tall !! If you go through the forum we have had confirmation on height from many multiple sources.

Yes, You may have various confirmations from the company itself. But I am saying that the company may be lying about it. Today if the company says it's 350 mtrs to e.g. Indian Express or someone more authoritative. Obviously they will present it in that way. But I am suggesting that Palais Royale is only 298 mtrs. (not 320 mtrs.) This is a fraud on the face of it. If you go to the site. ask them for the plan. Asking the floor height of each floor, ask them all the details where the height will be more than the floor height, ask them about the Terrace height, the antenna or anything = then add them up you will only get 298 mtrs. So no matter what the sources say, the fact is something completely different.

And if you are comparing the 55 floors of victoria, Victoria does not have the massive floor height of 14ft. so Palais Royale's 45th floor or something may very well cross the 55 floors Victoria.

And mind you Palais Royale is a very very tall building for 67 floors. There are building of 75 floors and 80 floors which do not reach that height sometimes. (irrespective of 298 mtrs or 320 mtrs)

^^ You read that article totally wrong! They said that this tower was one of 11 towers to be given certificates to build car park levels of between 10-20 levels, and that once they are completed they would be handed over to BMC. ( which I guess is a car park company of some sort).

Also the information on the architects site says that this will be 320m.

I'm not sure where you got 14ft per floor from because the average height for the floors in this tower is 4.5m which over 67 floors is around 300m and add the thing on top, which you can see in the below picture, it will make the 320m mark. (I posted the wrong photo last time sorry)

Architects website (http://tparch.net/viewproject.php?id=22)

http://tparch.net/large/Palais%20Royale2.jpg

:cheers:

Well I am getting my sources from the people who are literally building each of those floors in person. Please visit the site yourself and figure it out. I thought this information would help people not fall for the false public release of the false information about 320 mtrs. But I think you'll are happy with the false impression. I am more than glad.

Oh and by the way, you haven't understood the article correctly, it is in return of those parking floors that your number of floors increase and your FSI is increased (which in total increases the number of floors and height of the building). So please read the article thoroughly and re-read it again and keep reading it till you understand it correctly (if required please google about it also, it will help you.)

I hope you dont mind but here is a pic that I took during my vacation in early march this year. sorry for the delay!
http://i44.tinypic.com/15db1h.jpg

^^ I'm sure this has been posted on the Indian forums.

what? this is my pic! so that couldnt have been posted before!

I guess a lot of people go to that Hotel, so we have a lot of pictures from that angle. But thanks a lot, the more the better. Looks taller now.

what? this is my pic! so that couldnt have been posted before!

Umm, maybe you uploaded it before and some forum remember just found it ? I'm sure you were given due credits.

Mihir, multiple photos have been taken from that spot, probably why the confusion.

how many meters?

May 5 2012.

Photo copyright: Udaykumar Parambalathu (http://www.panoramio.com/photo/71709766)

http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/8208/71709766.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/96/71709766.jpg/)....

^^ That one is a monster of a building!

Can anyone post new photos of other Mumbai's supertalls ?